Moderator Messages - no Notifications?

[PinkDalek]

This post doesn't concern the current TLF emailing problems nor is it inviting comments on moderation more generally.

Clariman provided a useful update on the Emailed Notifications Topic on here at 10:30am:

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=6617&p=71455#p71455

As far as I am aware, such messages, within the ***Mod Box, do not generate a Notification. I've seen this before where certain aspects of posts have been removed and a Mod Box message is entered. The poster concerned then appears to carry on regardless, perhaps never having been notified of (nor noticed) the Mod's Message.

I hope this makes sense and might be a point to note in future. That is if I'm correct on what happens. Perhaps Mods should do what is necessary where posts are concerned but also reply in the same way non-Mods do (in other words, not in the Mod Box, thus hopefully generating a Notification).


*** I couldn't think of another term to describe it.

[Itsallaguess]

As far as I am aware, such messages, within the ***Mod Box, do not generate a Notification. I've seen this before where certain aspects of posts have been removed and a Mod Box message is entered. The poster concerned then appears to carry on regardless, perhaps never having been notified of (nor noticed) the Mod's Message.

I hope this makes sense and might be a point to note in future. That is if I'm correct on what happens. Perhaps Mods should do what is necessary where posts are concerned but also reply in the same way non-Mods do (in other words, not in the Mod Box, thus hopefully generating a Notification).

I can see your point PD, and agree that where Mod-boxes are used to convey moderation-messages in existing posts, then there's a good chance these might be missed by the originator of that post, who may never go on to be aware of the subsequent inclusion of those Mod-boxes, in the absence of any type of actual notification that this might have happened to an existing, old post of theirs....

I don't think we're going to do away with the need for the original Mod-boxes in some instances, however, because in many cases these will be included in existing posts because some of them have had to be edited by the Mod-team, to possibly remove or alter some of the original content, which presumably will have been seen to breach one or some of the TLF posting rules.

The issue then is, how to make the OP of those possibly-modified posts clearly aware that they've actually had an existing post modified....

Perhaps if it was generally agreed that where an existing post is modified, and then a Mod-box included on those posts, and then a 'proper' REPLY to that modified post was created on the thread, which would also then include the Mod-box comments and any alterations carried out, the original poster of the Mod-modified post would then always be correctly notified by the board-software that this is the case, clearly identifying to him that there's been some Mod-interaction on their board-content.

Have I got the original premise correct, and do you think the above solution would go some way to solving the problem?

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[mc2fool]

Perhaps Mods should do what is necessary where posts are concerned but also reply in the same way non-Mods do (in other words, not in the Mod Box, thus hopefully generating a Notification).

Perhaps if it was generally agreed that where an existing post is modified, and then a Mod-box included on those posts, and then a 'proper' REPLY to that modified post was created on the thread, which would also then include the Mod-box comments and any alterations carried out, the original poster of the Mod-modified post would then always be correctly notified by the board-software that this is the case, clearly identifying to him that there's been some Mod-interaction on their board-content.

I do believe that is what PD was suggesting (if I read it correctly).

But is it beyond the scale of "small" software changes to just get the site to issue a notification automatically under a "Your post is edited by a moderator" notification option?

Or possibly even hang it off of the existing (and seemingly currently redundant?) "Your topics/posts are approved or disapproved by a moderator" option?

[PinkDalek]

...

The issue then is, how to make the OP of those possibly-modified posts clearly aware that they've actually had an existing post modified....

Perhaps if it was generally agreed that where an existing post is modified, and then a Mod-box included on those posts, and then a 'proper' REPLY to that modified post was created on the thread, which would also then include the Mod-box comments and any alterations carried out, the original poster of the Mod-modified post would then always be correctly notified by the board-software that this is the case, clearly identifying to him that there's been some Mod-interaction on their board-content.

Have I got the original premise correct, and do you think the above solution would go some way to solving the problem?

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Yes, I think that's what I was trying to suggest, without really wishing to have created additional work for the Mods. It was more of an observation than anything else.

What I don't know is if your " 'proper' REPLY to that modified post " needs to include the Modded person's username (or not) to generate a Notification. I've seen you suggest it does elsewhere (I think it was you) but I'm unsure on this point.

We could always test it at Testing 123 ..., if you want and have the time.

[chas49]

This seems to raise a useful point. I'm happy to test out in 123 if it helps. I'll also flag this topic up to the rest of the mod team

[PinkDalek]

This seems to raise a useful point. I'm happy to test out in 123 if it helps. I'll also flag this topic up to the rest of the mod team

Thanks, here you go:

viewtopic.php?f=28&t=6634

You cannot make another post so soon after your last.

[mc2fool]

What I don't know is if your " 'proper' REPLY to that modified post " needs to include the Modded person's username (or not) to generate a Notification. I've seen you suggest it does elsewhere (I think it was you) but I'm unsure on this point.

That depends on the "Modded" person's notification option settings.

"Someone quotes you in a post" requires the username ([quote="PinkDalek"]) for the possibility of issuing a notification -- but they may have that notification option turned off.

"Someone replies to a topic you have bookmarked" & "Someone replies to a topic to which you are subscribed" don't require the username but, of course, do require the person to have bookmarked and/or subscribed to the topic -- and even then, they may have those notification options turned off.

It seems that there's no (existing) reliable way of issuing a notification for a modded post, as all notifications can be turned off.

The only way of (mostly) reliably alerting the user to the fact that their post was modified is to send them a private message. Notifications for those can also be turned off but at least it will show under "Private Messages [n]" at the top-right of each page, which the user is (mostly) likely to notice sooner or later.

[PinkDalek]

Yes, understood, thanks. I've now unsubscribed at Testing 123 to see what happens Notification wise, when a Mod next replies.

[melonfool]

PM'ing on top of the mod box looks like the current only answer but it would be a bit of a pain for mods as the point of the mod box is 'quick and dirty' rather than deleting and having to PM.

I wonder if an override of the notifications can be achieved of "always notify if a mod comments on any thread a poster has posted on"?

Mel

[PinkDalek]

Testing is complete in so far as I asked the correct questions.

One thing I should perhaps point is that one can't specifically "rec" Mod Box comments but would be able to "rec" a separate Mod Reply.

That may or may not be such a good idea, as people get a little iffy about partisanship and cliques et al, as you know all too well!

[melonfool]

It occurs to me that my genius suggestion is useless as mods also post as themselves (no universal, or specific, 'mod log in') and no-one wants notifications every time I post some old drivel.

So.....other solutions required!

(I agree it is an issue)

Mel

[csearle]

It occurs to me that... ...no-one wants notifications every time I post some old drivel

Surely our stooz could fashion a special filter designed especially to selectfor your dri.., er no, let me think of another word, er, contribution, and notify accordingly?

[Gengulphus]

It occurs to me that my genius suggestion is useless as mods also post as themselves (no universal, or specific, 'mod log in') and no-one wants notifications every time I post some old drivel.

So.....other solutions required!

Change policy so that moderators should have two IDs, one for when they're posting as themselves and the other for when they're posting as a moderator, with only the latter having moderator privileges. Then you can post any old drivel you like under the first!

And you could also use the first to check up on what's visible to ordinary users - I know from a previous exchange of ours that that can be a bit of a problem...

Gengulphus

[Lootman]

It occurs to me that my genius suggestion is useless as mods also post as themselves (no universal, or specific, 'mod log in') and no-one wants notifications every time I post some old drivel.

So.....other solutions required!

Change policy so that moderators should have two IDs, one for when they're posting as themselves and the other for when they're posting as a moderator, with only the latter having moderator privileges. Then you can post any old drivel you like under the first!

And you could also use the first to check up on what's visible to ordinary users - I know from a previous exchange of ours that that can be a bit of a problem...

Good idea, although it doesn't need any change of policy. Any Lemon who is also a moderator can do that now. Just go ahead and set up a second "ordinary" account.

Might need to use a different email address, depending how TLF handles that.

[melonfool]

Gengulphus is right that the mods did have quite a bit of 'can anyone else see this' going on at the start - I *think* we've got it sussed now. So, for example, if a post is deleted, the mod can see a collapsed post, they can expand it and see the deleted post and they can also see a link to the report. And they can reinstate the deleted post. Only on boards they themselves moderate.

It took me a while to realise that not everyone could see the collapsed post to indicate that a deleted post was in the thread. Similar things do still come up from time to time.

the rules do not state the duplicate accounts are not allowed, but it's very common for a forum to have that rule so I will propose that is added to the site rules. This is especially important on boards that discuss finance to prevent ramping and circular supportive discussions purporting to be agreeing with each other but in fact being the same person.

Where that leaves the idea of the separate mod log-in I'm not sure. I'm ambivalent about it, can see both sides (and don't really want two separate log-ins, I already have that sort of set up with one of my clients who has set me up a Gmail account where I already have one, and a Facebook page linked to his account, where I already have a Facebook account, so it's hard to work out which log in works for which).

Mel

[Gengulphus]

Change policy so that moderators should have two IDs, one for when they're posting as themselves and the other for when they're posting as a moderator, with only the latter having moderator privileges. Then you can post any old drivel you like under the first!

Good idea, although it doesn't need any change of policy. Any Lemon who is also a moderator can do that now. Just go ahead and set up a second "ordinary" account.

I'm not talking about what it's possible for melonfool to do. I'm talking about TLF's policy about what moderators should do. In a previous conversation I had with melonfool some months back, she indicated that it was that moderators should only have one ID. It is of course possible that the change I am suggesting has already been made - but I've seen no indication of that.

Gengulphus

[Lootman]

the rules do not state the duplicate accounts are not allowed, but it's very common for a forum to have that rule so I will propose that is added to the site rules. This is especially important on boards that discuss finance to prevent ramping and circular supportive discussions purporting to be agreeing with each other but in fact being the same person.

Sites vary in how they handle the issue of multiple accounts. For example, one site I use has a limit of five accounts per person. There are some legitimate reasons for having multiple accounts, and I believe that we have discussed some of them before on TLF.

But regardless of any policy about how many accounts one can have, there should definitely be a rule against Lemons using multiple accounts to agree with themselves, "thank" themselves, gang up on others and other manipulative behaviours. I think that goes without saying. One way I have seen other sites handle that is to simply say that "multiple accounts are allowed but only one should be used at a time".

I'm talking about TLF's policy about what moderators should do. In a previous conversation I had with melonfool some months back, she indicated that it was that moderators should only have one ID. It is of course possible that the change I am suggesting has already been made - but I've seen no indication of that.

Mel just mentioned that there is currently no policy prohibition against having a second account.

[melonfool]

the rules do not state the duplicate accounts are not allowed, but it's very common for a forum to have that rule so I will propose that is added to the site rules. This is especially important on boards that discuss finance to prevent ramping and circular supportive discussions purporting to be agreeing with each other but in fact being the same person.

Sites vary in how they handle the issue of multiple accounts. For example, one site I use has a limit of five accounts per person. There are some legitimate reasons for having multiple accounts, and I believe that we have discussed some of them before on TLF.

But regardless of any policy about how many accounts one can have, there should definitely be a rule against Lemons using multiple accounts to agree with themselves, "thank" themselves, gang up on others and other manipulative behaviours. I think that goes without saying. One way I have seen other sites handle that is to simply say that "multiple accounts are allowed but only one should be used at a time".

I'm talking about TLF's policy about what moderators should do. In a previous conversation I had with melonfool some months back, she indicated that it was that moderators should only have one ID. It is of course possible that the change I am suggesting has already been made - but I've seen no indication of that.

Mel just mentioned that there is currently no policy prohibition against having a second account.

Nothing goes without saying!

Mel

[chas49]

It occurs to me that my genius suggestion is useless as mods also post as themselves (no universal, or specific, 'mod log in') and no-one wants notifications every time I post some old drivel.

So.....other solutions required!

Change policy so that moderators should have two IDs, one for when they're posting as themselves and the other for when they're posting as a moderator, with only the latter having moderator privileges. Then you can post any old drivel you like under the first!

And you could also use the first to check up on what's visible to ordinary users - I know from a previous exchange of ours that that can be a bit of a problem...

Gengulphus

I can see the attractions of this simple policy. In my opinion - and I'm posting as an individual user who happens to be a mod for some boards here - this would make the role of moderator much harder.

I visit the boards daily (often more frequently) and scan through the areas that interest me. When someone reports a post in one of "my" boards, I get a notification. I then look at the report and decide if anything needs doing. If I spot something which hasn't been reported but needs action, I deal with it.

If I had to log in with a separate moderator account to do those things, I would find it much less convenient to be a mod.

We're all volunteers - and anything which makes our role significantly harder would in my view be undesirable.

[Gengulphus]

Mel just mentioned that there is currently no policy prohibition against having a second account.

No, she said something similar about the rules, which from context I reckon was about what one can read under the "Rules" link above - the site rules that apply to all users. My remark was about policy about what moderators should and shouldn't do, which is not the same thing.

Gengulphus